Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
General Discussion | moderated by Dev Singh

Is it true that yoga will awaken deeper energy, which is called kundalini?


Displaying posts 1 - 30 of 58 in total
Thu, 16 Jun 2016 #1
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 865 posts in this forum Offline

Krishnamurti answers this question in a video here (just over 11 minutes). Any reactions to this?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 16 Jun 2016 #2
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

Well, K unsurprisingly says that there can only be another kind of energy when self is NOT ... because self is in constant conflict with 'what is', in constant struggle, in constant resistance ... and all those movements, all this resistance, are waste of energy ... and you can make yoga or sit in zazen for the rest of your life without even coming near to that :-)

Why resist 'what is' ?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 17 Jun 2016 #3
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 649 posts in this forum Offline

Thank you, Sean Hen, for pointing out this fascinating video. There's a lot here worth going into.

I'm going to start at the end (9:45 in the video) and discuss K's telling of the story about the futility of polishing the brick to try to make a mirror. This is a Zen Buddhist mondo, a conversation between the Chinese Zen Master Nan-yüeh Huai-jang (Nangaku Ejõ, 677-774) and his student, Ma-tsu Tao-i (Baso Doichi, 709-788), who would himself become an important Zen Master. Krishnamurti denigrated Zen Buddhism and all organized religions. Yet here he is quoting a famous Zen Buddhist teaching story. K does this many times in Michael Krohnen's book, The Kitchen Chronicles: 1001 Lunches with J. Krishnamurti. That's right! Again and again in that book, Krishnamurti references short Zen Buddhist stories and never attributes them to their source: Zen. So either he had read those stories, despite his claim that he never read spiritual books. Or more likely, some acquaintance of his fed him the stories and he liked them and therefore repeated them.

The story seems straightforward enough: just as it is futile to try to polish a brick into a mirror, so it is futile to do zazen (sitting meditation) to polish yourself into a Buddha. And yet it is important in Zen to realize your Buddha nature! How can this be done if not by zazen? The same problem plagues Krishnamurtians. Awareness where there is no sense of self whatsoever is important in the teachings. Yet there is no method, no way to achieve it.

Before his own enlightenment, Zen Master Dogen was deeply disturbed by this. He knew that everyone was supposedly already a Buddha. So why was zazen and the rest of Zen practice necessary? But if one did nothing to realize the innate Buddha nature, wouldn't one continue in ignorant, hurtful ways, desiring and clinging to this and that? So he left Japan and went to China to study Zen. Eventually Dogen found his answer. His commentary includes, "Clearly, in truth, when polishing a tile becomes a mirror, Baso becomes Buddha. When Baso becomes Buddha, Baso immediately becomes Baso. When Baso becomes Baso, zazen immediately becomes zazen." (from Shobogenzo)

So some people would say that you polish anyway and let go of all thought of becoming. Others say no.

In Zen, there are two main schools, one called the Gradual School (Soto) and one called the Sudden School (Rinzai). This story can be seen as a cleavage between the two schools. In one school you just polish anyway with no goal. Polishing itself, for its own sake, is the realization. In the other, you must see now, instantly, and polishing will never get you anywhere. And yet the story is also a reconciliation of the two schools. Because in both, you do a lot of zazen over many years and in both insight is deeply valued.

There is no method, no path to what is right under your feet. Yet you are lost, still in conflict, still suffering and inflicting violence, still conditioned. You can do nothing. And yet you must!

Will you just fool yourself? I'm sorry to say that it is quite easy to fool yourself and believe that you have the insight and understanding that K discusses. I wonder what is worse: the fool yourself disease where you are wise and come to the kinfonet forum and proffer your insight, all the while wondering why others don't appreciate your profundity? Seems like some here fall into that boat? Or if you just polish in vain, chasing this teaching and that, this guru or that, this kundalini energy or that chi or whatever?

Right now the tree outside the window gently sways in the breeze. It's leaves are touched by the golden morning sun. Maybe together, my friends, we can end some of the violence, some of the mischief in this world.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Fri, 17 Jun 2016.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 2 readers
Back to Top
Fri, 17 Jun 2016 #4
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5668 posts in this forum Offline

Krishnamurti, from his many statements over the years, had a high regard for the Buddha. What he apparently didn't have a high regard for was the fact that people have made a religion out of Buddha's teachings complete with ceremonies, dogma, rituals and beliefs.

K once said (I regret that I can't find a citation for this): If people had understood what the Buddha said there wouldn't be any "Buddhists".

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Fri, 17 Jun 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 17 Jun 2016 #5
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 649 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
What he apparently didn't have a high regard for was the fact that people have made a religion out of Buddha's teachings complete with ceremonies, dogma, rituals and beliefs.

This most definitely is problematic in Zen Buddhism today. There are vows, bows, and hows. There is the authority of the teacher. K rightly points out many trappings in organized religion and Zen Buddhism certainly has its share.

Is the heart of Zen Buddhism and the core of K teaching essentially the same? I don't know if I would go that far.

However, I do feel that serious Zen students would benefit from K teaching, especially that meditation is inclusion, not exclusion. And K people would benefit from the practicality of actually doing quiet sitting and moving meditation: action without idea. Although these are strongly in K teaching, how many K people would prefer to intellectualize about ideas K discussed rather than to sit silently with an open heart?

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Fri, 17 Jun 2016 #6
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1432 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
Although these are strongly in K teaching, how many K people would prefer to intellectualize about ideas K discussed rather than to sit silently with an open heart?

For me one of the most interesting things about K. is the lack of any 'rules', rituals, authorities, etc. These things, whether to do them or not, follow or not is completely left up to each person involved. Having been part of an organization around 'spiritual' ideas, you know how quickly 'leaders' appear, the hierarchy: the most 'learned', the most articulate etc....we don't know if something like a 'religion' will form around K.s work in the future, where someone will figure out a way to profit from it. (money-wise or power-wise) But I agree with you that there is 'work' to be done, "arduous" work, K. has called it, however the 'method' has to be,rightly or wrongly, one's own, I think.

This may be all wrong of course

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Fri, 17 Jun 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 17 Jun 2016 #7
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3169 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
For me one of the most interesting things about K. is the lack of any 'rules', rituals, authorities, etc. These things, whether to do them or not, follow or not is completely left up to each person involved

"The speaker is not your authority." In the 'spiritual' world this is truly unique. Well in ANY realm of society this is unheard of. The boss at work wants to be your authority...the teacher at school....the priest...the parent. Only K...no one else that I'm aware of....has pointed out the danger of following authority....paths....ideals....methods, etc. But we want to be safe and fulfilled, and the authority guarantees us a safe journey....or so we think.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Fri, 17 Jun 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 18 Jun 2016 #8
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1432 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
But we want to be safe and fulfilled, and the authority guarantees us a safe journey....or so we think.

And its in the brain cells...I saw a long line of buddhist monks on a film clip the other day, all in saffron robes all heads shaved in the same way...has no-one in the buddhist community spoken out about this conformity? Has no-one pointed out the danger, divisiveness of this kind of outward show of belonging to a special group...separate from others?

This may be all wrong of course

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Sat, 18 Jun 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 18 Jun 2016 #9
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3169 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Has no-one pointed out the danger, divisiveness of this kind of outward show of belonging to a special group?

I guess not...they all want to be a success....in the 'spiritual' realm. So they accept this authority. There's inward division too, of course...conforming to the ideal. The monk is avoiding what he actually is and pursuing fulfillment in the spiritual realm, which he calls enlightenment. Can he understand himself by running away from himself....his desires, cravings, fears, anger, etc.? That's what he's doing, isn't it...running away or suppressing. I found this interesting quote a few hours ago. It's 180 degrees polar opposite to the spiritual practice of the monk...from K.: "Know what it means to live with actuality. In observing myself I find I am jealous, anxious, or envious - I realize that. Now I want to live with that because it is only when I live with something intimately that I begin to understand it. But to live with my envy, with my anxiety, is one of the most difficult things - I see that the moment I get used to it I am not living with it."

and: " to live with a living thing like jealousy, envy, means that I can never accept it, I can never get used to it - I must care for it as I would care for a newly planted tree, I must protect it against the sun, against the storm. So, in the same way, I have to live with this anxiety and envy, I must care for it, not get used to it, not condemn it. In this way I begin to love it and to care for it, which is not that I love to be envious or anxious, but rather that I care for the watching. It is like living with a snake in the room, gradually I begin to see my immediate relationship to it and there is no conflict.

So, can you and I, live with what we actually are? Being dull, envious, fearful, thinking that we have tremendous affection when we have not, getting easily hurt, flattered, bored, can we live with these actualities, neither accepting nor denying, but observing, living with them without becoming morbid, depressed or elated?"

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sat, 18 Jun 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 18 Jun 2016 #10
Thumb_beautiful-nature-wallpaper pavani rao India 541 posts in this forum Offline

Hi Idiot ?
It's wonderful reading both your posts , eloquent and elegant summarizing all and everything . Nothing more to add . But only one heart felt suggestion .. Having come in contact with this marvelous jewel of teaching its a pity if one still prefers to live in illusions and delusions.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 18 Jun 2016 #11
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 649 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:

For me one of the most interesting things about K. is the lack of any 'rules', rituals, authorities, etc. These things, whether to do them or not, follow or not is completely left up to each person involved.

-

Tom Paine wrote:
"The speaker is not your authority." In the 'spiritual' world this is truly unique. Well in ANY realm of society this is unheard of. The boss at work wants to be your authority...the teacher at school....the priest...the parent. Only K...no one else that I'm aware of....has pointed out the danger of following authority....paths....ideals....methods, etc.

I agree that investigating for yourself is extremely important, one of the very most important of K's teachings.

However, ironically, this teaching may have come to K from his spiritual teacher, C.W. Leadbeater! And maybe also from Annie Besant. K was taught all kinds of Theosophical baloney such as auras, chakras, clairvoyance, astral travel, the Masters. But he was also, thankfully, taught to investigate for himself.

C.W. Leadbeater wrote in What Theosophy Does For Us:
there is a coherent and reasonable theory of the universe — a plain declaration of the great facts of nature, so far as they are known — a statement which is not to be accepted as a creed, but to be studied and investigated. Theosophy is such a statement — a definite science the result of many centuries of research and experiment, yet verified in our day by many of its students, and verifiable by anyone who is willing to take the trouble to qualify himself for such enquiry.

-

C.W. Leadbeater wrote in An Outline of Theosophy:
Theosophy may be described to the outside world as an intelligent theory of the universe. Yet for those who have studied it, it is not theory, but fact; for it is a definite science, capable of being studied, and its teachings are verifiable by investigation and experiment for those who are willing to take the trouble to qualify themselves for such enquiry.

There are other instances in the Theosophy literature where they discuss investigating for yourself and verifying. This was the influence of science on new age thought which continues to this day with all kinds of pseudoscience.

So while K was likely to have been taught to think and investigate for himself, he really carried that through and eventually threw off a lot of the Theosophical nonsense of his teenage upbringing.

In any case it absolutely is important to investigate for yourself.

K said:
Observation is not possible if there is any form of prejudice, conclusion, a formula according to which you are observing. If you are observing according to some psychologist, you really are not observing yourself. You are observing what the psychologist has said to you and through that you are observing.

Agreed. And that "psychologist" could be named Krishnamurti.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Sat, 18 Jun 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 18 Jun 2016 #12
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
The monk is avoiding what he actually is and pursuing fulfillment in the spiritual realm, which he calls enlightenment. Can he understand himself by running away from himself....his desires, cravings, fears, anger, etc.? That's what he's doing, isn't it...running away or suppressing.

Right Tom, the way of the monk is an 'escape' and a form of 'isolation' from the world ... and for doing that the monk has to accept and submit himself to another form of authority, rules, beliefs etc ... this is called falling from Charybdis to Scylla ...

Why resist 'what is' ?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 18 Jun 2016 #13
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5668 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
However, ironically, this teaching may have come to K from his spiritual teacher, C.W. Leadbeater!

You need to start citing your quotes. I know that's not possible 100 per cent of the time but you don't seem to be making an effort with your multiple "quotes".

And from reading what Mary Lutyens and K said about CWL the only thing K got from Leadbeater was away from him.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 18 Jun 2016 #14
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 649 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine, all my quotes are in boxes and cited. The writings of C.W. Leadbeater are available online. I have cited both his name and the titles of his Theosophy pamphlets above.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 18 Jun 2016 #15
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 649 posts in this forum Offline

pavani rao wrote:
Having come in contact with this marvelous jewel of teaching its a pity if one still prefers to live in illusions and delusions.

Pavani Rao, I don't understand what you are asking or saying. K himself met many people very interested in his teachings and yet he never presented anyone saying, "Now here is someone who gets it and is free of illusions and delusions."

Not sure what you are saying.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 18 Jun 2016 #16
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1432 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
K.: " to live with a living thing like jealousy, envy, means that I can never accept it, I can never get used to it - I must care for it as I would care for a newly planted tree, I must protect it against the sun, against the storm. So, in the same way, I have to live with this anxiety and envy, I must care for it, not get used to it, not condemn it. In this way I begin to love it and to care for it, which is not that I love to be envious or anxious, but rather that I care for the watching. It is like living with a snake in the room, gradually I begin to see my immediate relationship to it and there is no conflict.

So, can you and I, live with what we actually are? Being dull, envious, fearful, thinking that we have tremendous affection when we have not, getting easily hurt, flattered, bored, can we live with these actualities, neither accepting nor denying, but observing, living with them without becoming morbid, depressed or elated?"

Thought tries to understand this but this seems to be 'beyond thought'?

This may be all wrong of course

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 18 Jun 2016 #17
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3169 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
However, ironically, this teaching may have come to K from his spiritual teacher, C.W. Leadbeater! And maybe also from Annie Besant. K was taught all kinds of Theosophical baloney such as auras, chakras, clairvoyance, astral travel, the Masters. But he was also, thankfully, taught to investigate for himself.

That's the point....whether he heard it first from someone else or not, he saw the truth of not following/accepting authority for himself. Otherwise he would be accepting the authority of a teaching of not following/accepting authority :)

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 18 Jun 2016 #18
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5668 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
K said:
Observation is not possible if there is any form of prejudice, conclusion, a formula according to which you are observing. If you are observing according to some psychologist, you really are not observing yourself. You are observing what the psychologist has said to you and through that you are observing.

Can you tell me where the citation is for this quote from your post 11? You do understand that giving a citation does not mean "K said"? It means giving where the quote is from so that if someone chooses they can look up the quote themselves. And while I'm not at all concerned or interested in anything that Leadbeater said quotes from him need to be cited properly. Not just giving the name of the pamphlet it's from. I do think you ought to cite K when you quote him.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Sat, 18 Jun 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 18 Jun 2016 #19
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5668 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
That's the point....whether he heard it first from someone else or not, he saw the truth of not following/accepting authority for himself. Otherwise he would be accepting the authority of a teaching of not following/accepting authority :)

In his later life K often wondered how the "boy" was able to not be conditioned at all from all the time he spent with the Theosophists and all of their indoctrination. Tom, I'm sure you've read in Mary Z's book about how K wondered how the "boy" had escaped completely being conditioned.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 18 Jun 2016 #20
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 865 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
Right now the tree outside the window gently sways in the breeze. It's leaves are touched by the golden morning sun. Maybe together, my friends, we can end some of the violence, some of the mischief in this world.

To use a Jack Pineism, I think you've hit the nail on the head there idiot ?.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 18 Jun 2016 #21
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5668 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
Jack Pine, all my quotes are in boxes and cited. The writings of C.W. Leadbeater are available online. I have cited both his name and the titles of his Theosophy pamphlets above.

OK to belabor the point a little bit more. Can you see where this is not enough? If you lifted this quote from something you read then give the page number or Chapter. Are we suppose to read through the whole book to find this quote? Also, if instead of quoting you have actually paraphrased then this needs to be stated. A paraphrase is someone's opinion or interpretation about something they have read.

It's more than just a courtesy to your reader to give adequate citations. It is necessary to support your thesis. Peer review of anything written keeps what is being presented "honest" in that it can be checked. Some people, I am not saying you would do this, actually misquote on purpose or accidently just to make a point.

Giving citations means giving the source of the quote, book, chapter and page if possible.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 18 Jun 2016 #22
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5668 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
To use a Jack Pineism, I think you've hit the nail on the head there idiot ?.

Don't do that Sean. Don't attribute something to me that I don't remember writing ever on this forum. Thanks

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 18 Jun 2016 #23
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 865 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
Don't do that Sean. Don't attribute something to me that I don't remember writing ever on this forum. Thanks

Sorry Jack - I was being jokey which is always a bit risky. You did write that once about something I wrote. Anyway, point taken and sorry once again.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 18 Jun 2016 #24
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 865 posts in this forum Offline

Thanks to all of you who have contributed to the thread I started. I've found the discussion very, very interesting.

About 28 years ago in Scotland, a friend of mine taught a small group of us Kundalini Yoga. We sometimes even got up before the sun had risen and did yoga. We regularly met on Monday evenings to do Kundalini then share food we had cooked. We also talked about leading a good, moral life. All in all I think this was a very positive thing. Doing Kundalini Yoga does give you tremendous energy and I have personally experiened this. My friend who was the yoga teacher was a follower of an Eastern religion and he had a strict dress and behavioural code to abide by. I always found this a little strange. I had already read Krishnamurti and questioned this but my friend was a very positive influence on me in many ways. Have any of the rest of you here practised yoga?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 18 Jun 2016 #25
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3169 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
Tom, I'm sure you've read in Mary Z's book about how K wondered how the "boy" had escaped completely being conditioned.

Yes...I think I see your point....he was never a follower in the first place....he couldn't be conditioned by the TS, even though he outwardly went along with some of the 'show'. The whole story of his life is so fascinating. From M.Z's book:
"There was one once; I was spending a couple of months by myself—just Mama’s [Madahvachari’s] cook to look after me—and every afternoon I had to pass the village where a woman sannyasi had a hut. She sat with disciples, and one came as I passed and asked me to come. I said there is no reason to come, I am nobody, but he said she would welcome whomever it was, so I had to go and sit on the ground. It was clean—fairly clean—and she spoke a little and then asked my name. I said does it matter? Must I give my name? She said it was as I wished, and so I said my name. She said are you?—and mentioned many things. And after that she was there every day when I passed."

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 18 Jun 2016 #26
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
The whole story of his life is so fascinating.

Isn't your own life "fascinating" too Tom ? or maybe not 'enough' fascinating ?

Maybe you are 'fascinated' by the 'forms' that life takes, by the material or emotional aspects of life ... but what is 'fascinating' is life itself, beyond those forms ...

Why resist 'what is' ?

This post was last updated by Jean Gatti Sat, 18 Jun 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 18 Jun 2016 #27
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3169 posts in this forum Offline

Jean Gatti wrote:
Tom Paine wrote:

The whole story of his life is so fascinating.
Isn't your own life "fascinating" too Tom ? or maybe not 'enough' fascinating ?

Both....the story of K as well as ordinary daily living(which can sometimes be extraordinary)....people, too. But I find you're post incredibly disingenuous. You like movies don't you? I think you do. Did you know K regularly read mystery novels and loved a good adventure movie? Do you think that was because he found his own life not fascinating enough? Don't forget K specifically asked Mrs Z to take an hour or two every day to write what it was like to be with the man from Madanapalle. He must have felt his life was in some way way beyond the ordinary....extraordinary. Something worth reading about. He was very adamant that she take this writing seriously....and it lasted like 20 years. So please don't be so ridiculous about someone reading and enjoying this book which K wanted written.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sat, 18 Jun 2016.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Sat, 18 Jun 2016 #28
Thumb_au_b Alberto Brandeis United States 59 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
The story seems straightforward enough: just as it is futile to try to polish a brick into a mirror, so it is futile to do zazen (sitting meditation) to polish yourself into a Buddha. And yet it is important in Zen to realize your Buddha nature! How can this be done if not by zazen? The same problem plagues Krishnamurtians. Awareness where there is no sense of self whatsoever is important in the teachings. Yet there is no method, no way to achieve it.

A fine line, indeed.

Thought-provoking posts, idiot?. Much appreciated.

Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 18 Jun 2016 #29
Thumb_beautiful-nature-wallpaper pavani rao India 541 posts in this forum Offline

The difference and distinction between one who is ' real ' or ' fake ' can be observed by any body who has bothered to do some sincere and honest work with oneself can be easily made out Idiot ? Don't you think so ? Excuse my language of using the words of ' real ' and ' fake ' as they are appropriate in their connotations in the lexicon of K language . The living life and the learning happening in the direction of the teaching ... If we consider the parameters being taken into consideration, then the words sound acceptable I guess . So it's been a common understanding that intellectualization and just resorting to mere ' words ' do not lead any one any far . If there had been a ' search ' and passion to find out is there and not only that but a willingness to go that far is there , then certainly that earnestness and integrity can be reflected and can be seen .

On the other hand when some one just tries hard to show their intellectualization and there by earning some kind of supremacy in the forums ... I feel is just being ' infantile
' if they have issues and problems of ' inconsistencies ' in their lives , I feel that is the area they should focus upon , rather than spending efforts in impressing others and energies in some thing as ' arduous ' as this K teaching . In other words when some one understands with their entire being that as long as ' thought ' as ' self ' is not seen for what it is ... There cannot be any real and true understanding happening in their lives ... And the dawn of that very realization I feel is the beginning of ' wisdom ' .
I wonder how you see all these things .

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 19 Jun 2016 #30
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3169 posts in this forum Offline

Jean Gatti wrote:
Maybe you are 'fascinated' by the 'forms' that life takes, by the material or emotional aspects of life ... but what is 'fascinating' is life itself, beyond those forms ...

If there is no form, what exactly are you fascinated by? Can you say? K. loved a good adventure movie. After one movie, I forget which, he was so excited that he was shaking....according to Mrs. Zimbalist. Sorry I don't have the reference, but it's been written many times how much he enjoyed his mystery novels and a good adventure movie.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 1 - 30 of 58 in total
To quote a portion of this post in your reply, first select the text and then click this "Quote" link.

(N.B. Be sure to insert an empty line between the quoted text and your reply.)